82,891
edits
Automation eliminates value but not risk: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|design| | {{a|design|[[File:Noughts and crosses.png|450px|frameless|center]]}} | ||
{{Quote| | |||
[[File:Noughts and crosses.png|450px|frameless|center]] | {{caps|''Dr. Johnson''}}: Sir! I hope you’re not using the first English dictionary to look up rude words! <br> | ||
}} | {{caps:''Blackadder''}}: I wouldn't be too hopeful — that’s what all the other ones will be used for. | ||
}}{{drop|I|f you can}} [[Automated|automate]] something, you can’t monetise it. You automate, therefore, as a ''defensive'' strategy: because everyone else is automating, and if you don’t, your unit cost is higher. | |||
This plays to a pet theory of the [[JC]]’s: [[the quotidian is a utility, not an asset]]. If you believe you have [[intellectual property]] in your [[boilerplate]], you will waste precious resource defending an articulation of common knowledge.<ref>You didn’t ''invent'' the “[[rights cumulative]]” clause, now, did you?</ref> You will, accordingly, misprice that asset, and you may be disappointed in how much people will be prepared to pay for it. | This plays to a pet theory of the [[JC]]’s: [[the quotidian is a utility, not an asset]]. If you believe you have [[intellectual property]] in your [[boilerplate]], you will waste precious resource defending an articulation of common knowledge.<ref>You didn’t ''invent'' the “[[rights cumulative]]” clause, now, did you?</ref> You will, accordingly, misprice that asset, and you may be disappointed in how much people will be prepared to pay for it. | ||